NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2014 INTERACTIONS 71 INTERACTIONS.ACM.ORG DOI: 10.1145/2668969 COPYRIGHT HELD B Y AUTHORS. PUBLICATION RIGHTS LICENSED TO ACM. $15.00

vision, and objectives rather than relying on vague intentions or received wisdom about what constitutes good.

Anti-oppressive design workplaces can be constructed through careful and continual reflection, requests for outside help, and the implementation of genuine democracy. These measures are especially needed in the tech industry, where stark gender and race disparities prevail.

The worker cooperative is an excellent model for implementing these ideas. Employee ownership and workplace democracy go hand in hand, and stepping outside the traditional corporate model also makes way for innovative anti-oppressive business models. The worker co-op is an increasingly popular choice for both new and existing social enterprises, especially in the tech industry.

A new movement of anti-oppressive tech is growing.

Endnotes

1. http://socialgoodtech.org/

2. Burke, B, and Harrison, P. Anti-oppressive practice. In Barrett, Sheila, et al., eds.

Communication, Relationships and Care: A Reader. Routledge, 2004, 227–236.

3. http://ihollaback.org

4. The phrase “of any one gender” is worded so as not to presume a gender binary.

5. Unfortunately it will also likely limit the rate of our growth due to the aforementioned shortage. We have consciously chosen to place diversity and growth, as values, on equal footing.

6. Non-violence here refers to more than just the physical. Rosenberg’s Non-Violent Communication has been deeply influential for us.

7. A helpful commentary on this issue can be found at http://wearemammoth. com/2013/11/long-hours.

 

Thomas Smyth is a worker-owner at Sassafras Tech Collective, a worker-owned cooperative focused on building technologies for social change. He holds a Ph.D. in computer science from Georgia Tech and lives in a co-housing community in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

→ [e-mail]

Jill Dimond is a worker-owner at Sassafras Tech Collective. She holds a Ph.D. in human-centered computing from Georgia Tech. She has worked for Google and as an interaction designer. Her work has appeared in the New York Times, NPR, BBC, and the Washington Post, among others.

→ [e-mail]

familiar consumer and agricultural co-ops in that all patrons own a share of the business, except that the patrons are the workers themselves as opposed to the consumers or producers.

This arrangement makes for a flat ownership structure, in which each employee of the business (except trial members) owns exactly one share, an obvious prerequisite for genuine democracy. But note that democracy does not imply majority rule. Many worker co-ops have chosen decision by consensus as a more just standard.

Consensus can be difficult to achieve on some issues, but it eliminates the threat that a decision unfavorable to a minority is made despite their objections.

The worker co-op is an old organizational form that is enjoying a resurgence in the U. S. (especially in tech; see Figure 2) and has been a long-term fixture in other areas. The Mondragon Corporation of Spain’s Basque region is the world’s largest federation of worker co-ops, employing some 80,000 people. Worker co-ops tend to create long-term, stable jobs and a concern for community benefit.

Many espouse a “multiple bottom line,” wherein the business’s objectives are not limited to financial returns and include other values such as environmental sustainability, community impact, and worker happiness. This philosophy implies a dedication to worker-friendly policies such as full benefits for all employees and liberal paid time off, including maternity leave.

Reasonable work hours are also an important measure, especially in the tech industry, where long workweeks are common and sometimes even worn as a badge of honor. The expectation of employees to work long hours is not only unsustainable and inhumane [ 7] but also embeds several oppressions. Parents, especially mothers, are often unable to work long hours due to responsibilities to their children. Single and/or working-class mothers are especially vulnerable here—a policy of long work hours, even if only during certain “critical periods,” virtually guarantees their exclusion. Ableism and ageism also come into play—some people may not be physically capable of performing 10- or 12-hour days.

SHARING THE WEALTH

One challenge in working on anti-oppressive projects is that such projects are frequently underfunded.

To us, this is a manifestation of classist/capitalist oppression and a product of the vast wealth disparities in the U.S. and elsewhere. It is no coincidence that endeavors aimed at building equality and counteracting oppression and privilege struggle to gain access to capital. Such is the self-reinforcing nature of our predominant economic and social systems.

This fact suggests several measures for an anti-oppressive business model.

First is a commitment to leanness, since the lower costs are kept, the lower and more accessible rates can be. The somewhat lavish features expected of a modern tech workplace (catered lunches, high-value real estate, expensive swag, and the like) are at odds with this.

We suggest that these features, which seem designed to attract employees in a highly competitive labor market, would actually prove less attractive than a genuine ownership stake, democratic role, and social purpose if given the chance.

Second is a willingness to adjust rates on a sliding scale whereby clients pay what they are able to afford.

This policy combined with leanness measures can allow better-funded clients to subsidize less well-funded ones, with neither paying more than fair market value. The scope of work can also be creatively adjusted so that a viable, high-quality artifact can be delivered on a limited budget.

A NASCENT MOVEMENT

To return to the article’s title, we have hopefully conveyed that what we call “anti-oppressive design” is concerned with not only the theory and method of design itself but also the domain and environment in which design is carried out. It is an evolving collection of tools and approaches.

The anti-oppression framework and related notions of privilege and social justice provide a structure judging a design project’s “goodness.” Practitioners and researchers alike can use the framework to pose incisive questions about a project’s background,